Child Kidnapping with Fake Sweat Patch Drug Test Fraud - Blood Money Episode 201
|
Time
Text
America Happens is the lifestyle network of the 21st century.
Where we rage against the mainstream media.
Providing a place for censored people, censored cultures, censored ideas.
America Happens is uncensored entertainment.
With our flagship shows.
Blood Money with Bem Miller.
Where Are the Men? Conspiracy Truths with Mindy Robinson.
HN News Live with Corinne Clifford.
Gloves off with Joey Gilbert.
Debate Smackdown.
Unf*** Your Mind News.
Follow the money. The America Happens documentary series.
Medicine Cabinet.
Meet the frontline doctors.
And many more. On the Blood Money Podcast, we expose conspiracy, corruption, and controversy.
We tell the stories they won't tell.
We speak with the people they don't want you to know.
We give the information that's censored everywhere else.
You hear from the freedom fighters, the outliers, the frontline doctors, the whistleblowers, the moms and dads, the generals, the artists, The investigative journalists.
The legends. The icons.
The forward thinkers.
The professors. The teachers.
The good lawyers. The watchmen.
And the watch women. The activists.
The brilliant minds.
The musicians. The pastors.
The analysts. The patriots.
The risk takers.
The warriors. The victims.
The Riders. The Lions.
The Lions.
All right, welcome to the latest episode of Blood Money.
So today we have multiple guests.
Our topic of conversation is about the patches that they use in family law courts.
For those who've watched Blood Money before, you pretty much know my opinion about what family law court is.
I mean, we just did an episode called Family Law Terrorism.
I don't think there's anything in family law that's geared towards the, you know, the Welfare of children, the welfare of fathers, mothers.
It seems to be a money-making mechanism, and it seems to be highly corrupt.
Now, in line with that, we've heard about these patches, where it's these drug test patches, which they use these in family law courts.
Usually the judge mandates it, and a father or a mother are supposed to wear it.
This patch in order to test essentially their sweat and if there's drugs within somebody's body.
But the issue with these patches that we found, and this is something that I was enlightened about at least three years ago, is that these patches really don't work, that they give a lot of false positives.
And guess what? You've heard about a lot of false positives in terms of some of the tests with COVID. So this is like a reoccurring theme where we're forced upon You know, these things are forced upon us that don't necessarily work and then they have a domino effect because then you have parents not seeing their children, parents going to jail because of a false positive of a drug test.
So we're going to dive right into it.
I'm going to have everybody introduce themselves and give a brief introduction on who they are and then we'll dive into the questions.
So Brianna, if you don't mind saying who you are and what you do in this world.
Okay, I am Brianna and I had to wear the patch through family court.
What I do in this world. I'm a teamster, and so I do conventions.
And I go by Brianna, but my first name is Kristen.
So that's how Franny, I think, knows me as Kristen Maxwell.
But Bri is what I go by.
And my life was ruined by the patch.
Wow, wow. So we'll dive into some questions regarding that.
But Franny, tell us who you are.
I've been practicing law for 47 years.
I was the federal public defender for Nevada for 22 of those years.
And in relation to talking about the patch, about 20 years ago, I litigated the patch in federal court because it's being used.
It's not only being used in family court, but it's being used and still being used in many criminal courts, particularly for folks that are on supervised release or parole.
And so we were successful 20 years ago in federal court, and U.S. probation in federal court will not use the patch as a means of drug testing.
And there's a lot of mandated drug testing in federal court.
By statute. But they do not use the patch because of the evidence that came out at the hearing.
Wow. Wow. So I got a lot of questions about that.
I mean, try to kind of answer this briefly for the time being.
You're telling me that for 20 years we've known these patches don't work, but yet they're still parents being alienated from their children based upon a patch that we knew 20 years ago does not work.
Twenty years ago, the scientific research pointed to a high risk of false positives as a result of environmental contamination.
In the only peer-reviewed scientific studies that studied that risk, There are no others.
There's a guy that goes around on behalf of the company to testify, but he's never done the research, and he can't point to any research that's been done by any scientist that says that we were not right, that the patch has way too high of a risk of contamination.
There are probably several ways in which the patch can end up with a false positive.
The theory that I used and that was the basis of the motion here in Las Vegas was that people are picking up.
It's always meth or coke.
It's not going to be marijuana or opiates or that kind of thing.
It's going to be meth or coke.
They're picking it up on their skin somewhere, and it's everywhere.
It's on your money.
They did a test with elementary school kids and it was on little kids because it's everywhere and it's not seeable.
So I think it's important for people to understand that the issue is not, oh, I'm hanging out with a bunch of people smoking meth.
And therefore, it's sort of like secondhand smoke.
That's not the issue. That argument would never work anyway for a former drug addict anyway, right?
And so for that period of time, it's not a published ruling because the judge just had had it and said...
Go away. And so we don't have anything to point to.
We do have a couple of cases around the country to point to.
But for the most part, people can't afford to litigate the issue.
It costs a lot of money to litigate that issue.
And because you get a lot of cases that go the other way because they come in and they say, oh, I have a drug user in front of me, a former drug user.
Drug users lie.
And that's actually true.
So, you know, there's a reason why they say that.
But then they get bamboozled by FarmCheck, who uses their guy to say, everything's great about the patch.
These people are just manipulating it.
You know, we keep hearing these stories.
I mean, it seems as though whenever government's involved, there's all these questions, you know, voting machines, do they work?
Do they not work? These, you know, tests for COVID, do they work?
Do they not work? You know, they really want us to, you know, take this COVID vaccine.
I mean, they were pretty adamant about that.
Do they work? Do they not work?
And it seems as though a lot of the time, they don't work.
And you think that These government officials will be smart enough to notice that's not working.
But then what you see is this kind of like domino of corruption where it doesn't work, but then you have these corrupt individuals saying, no, no, no, it does work in order to keep this kind of false narrative going along because all the while they're making a whole bunch of money.
Louis, did I say that right? Louis or?
Louis or Louis is fine.
Sorry, I'm getting some... Sir, if you could introduce yourself, tell us, you know, who you are, what you do.
My name is Luis Vieira.
I'm a retired postal worker.
I work on cars, flip cars basically now in my spare time.
Nice to meet you finally, Franny, in person.
I don't know if you remember me, back in 2020 is when I first contacted you about the patch.
My experience basically, I mean, they basically said I started using meth two weeks into the program.
And I failed six times in a row.
And then I had Judge Harder, who actually recently committed suicide and found drugs in the system.
But one thing we were talking about, Brianna and I, was we were thinking about maybe starting a nonprofit organization, a 501 corporation, basically with our organization's primary purpose is to educate the public About the inaccuracies and failability rate of the sweat patch so that nobody loses their freedom or custody of their kids.
That's an idea.
That's an idea. Yeah.
I mean, if I was younger, you know, I would get more involved.
But I'm not younger than parents.
I'm definitely wanting to do it.
The main thing is probably just raising the money to get the articles in the corporation done and the legal framework as far as the 501 corporation.
What exactly happened with you, Louis?
Could you give us more detail as far as how these patches failed you?
Well, basically, like I said, I had taken drug tests.
Hair and urine tests and passed all those.
I took options when I first went in.
And like I said, they said the second week I showed positive for meth six weeks in a row.
When I found this out, I had court, I want to say, two weeks later.
And when I was in court, the judge was telling me, well, you didn't even go back.
And I'm like, well, why would I go back?
It doesn't work. Like Franny was saying, it's hard to believe.
This was Judge Harder?
Yeah, it was Judge Harder, Matthew Harder.
He recently committed suicide, and he had tested positive.
They found many drugs in his system in his toxicology report.
Tell me about Judge Harder, because we've covered Judge Harder quite a bit.
Steve Sanson, who we've interviewed quite a few times, put up many billboards.
Yeah, yeah. Put up many billboards, calling this guy out on his corruption.
Seems as though throughout all of this, you know, the bar is saying, oh, he's honorable, he's this and that.
But you talk to people, we the people, people on the streets that have been through Judge Harder's court, and it seems as though he would say things like, I am God.
He would often violate people's rights, separate families.
I mean, he's known as a judge that's, you know, literally, quote, like, destroyed hundreds of families, children, I mean, tell me about Judge Harder.
What is your opinion of Judge Harder?
How did Judge Harder treat you?
And what do you think about a suicide?
You know, can I tell you that this is sort of making me uncomfortable that I really think that I'm here for the patch?
I don't want to get caught up in the- Yeah, I get it.
Sure. We can stay on topic.
Yeah. You know, I'm still a lawyer.
Right, right, right. My whole thing is he just felt like he didn't read anything.
I mean, I didn't really think he was back.
He actually was very fair the first time we had gone to court, and I will give him that.
But the second time, he didn't really...
I don't think he read a single thing that was wrote because I was representing myself pro se, because I thought it was an easy case to win.
So other than that...
Did you actually present evidence that the patch doesn't work?
Yes, I submitted...
I submitted hair and urine tests for the same weeks.
Well, once I found out I tested positive for the following two weeks from ATI, which is the probation and parole place that they use for drug testing in Las Vegas.
And they're all negative.
And he wouldn't even look at that though.
He wouldn't consider and he said that I wouldn't be able to basically have the custody reinstated with my children.
Unless I completed this webpatch program, which I wasn't going to do because it doesn't work, obviously, because I didn't use any drugs.
So it's like, why would I put my faith in when I go back to this program and have to complete it when it said I did meth for six weeks?
And, you know, what's the point of going back with I didn't do any drugs and then saying I did drugs?
It's just going to say the same thing, obviously.
What were the repercussions in terms of your life, your relationship with your children?
Take me through that in terms of the false positives that this patch gave.
What happened particularly in your life?
It had a devastating effect as far as custody.
I had 50-50 custody with my ex and she was actually allowed to relocate to another state.
Yeah, that's pretty much where that's at right now.
How long haven't you seen your children for?
I've seen them. They're in Idaho now.
That's where I'm from originally, but I bought a house here in 2017, so I can't really just up and move.
I talk to them every day, so I see them.
I've seen them in person a couple times since then, so when I've gone back to Boise.
At this point, I'm just curious because we always talk about the repercussions of some of this bad behavior.
Would you say that your relationship with your children is healed?
Not fully, but I feel like I've missed out on a lot of like parenting as far as like sports and stuff.
Yeah Yeah, I mean here's where you're at.
Just being a part of your life.
There's another impact of these positive patches on people.
People who have had issues with drug abuse, when they've cleaned up, if the patch keeps telling the judge, no you haven't, you're not clean, you're using, The danger of relapsing is huge at that point.
I've never had any drug offense, never in my life.
So why did they want you to have a patch on?
I don't understand. It was interesting because it was during COVID and like I said I was doing myself pro se and I was just watching before court started Judge Carter and uh my ex's attorney for court just kind of casually and um he judge harter when it starts he just looks up at me and says mr vr are you ready to take a drug test today and i was just like what um and
uh basically i had submitted i had covid at the time and i was under a 14-day quarantine so there he was like wanting me to go take the test which i said okay that's fine i'll go take the test But then I called the place and they said they don't test positive COVID patients while you're in the corner.
He was telling me to, no matter what, if I have to get down there and take my test.
And then when I called the place, they said they don't test COVID positive people, which I had already filed with the court prior to even going to court that I was positive because I thought I had an in-person court hearing.
I wasn't aware that it was video conference.
Yeah. You know, we have a guest here that you...
We have a guest here that you actually don't see on screen.
The reason we're having him by voice only is because he's part of a, frankly, a pretty high profile case.
We're just going to call him Mr.
A for right now. Mr. A, are you still back there?
I am. I am, Ben.
I'm here. So I want you to tell the viewers about what happened to you because you're coming at this from a different perspective.
Right now, we're talking about people that are low income, that are being targeted because they don't have the funds, the wherewithal, whatever to fight this long battle to prove that these patches don't work, right?
Your case is a little bit different.
Take us through your case and what happened to you.
Well, let me bring you back to the beginning, just like Lewis was talking about.
So I volunteered for these things because of the allegations from my ex.
This was over a decade ago that I've been fighting these patches.
And so my ex had allegations, so I said, sure, just like Lewis said, will you go take a drug test right now?
I was not, this was 10 years ago, obviously COVID was around, but not at, you know, whatever.
So I took the test, it was clean, and they said, well, we want to monitor you.
And we want to monitor you over the patch.
And we want you to wear the patch 24-7.
I said, sure, I'll do whatever it takes.
I want my kids. I had 50-50 custody at the time.
The kids were living with me.
She lived in Nevada.
We originally were from California, but both kids were born in Nevada.
So Nevada had jurisdiction, right?
So I jumped through the hoops.
I did all the things.
They wanted six months.
I went through five months.
I went through five and a half months.
Come six months, you know, paying $100 a week, $150 a week to change my patch, to show up.
Even though I live in Southern Highlands, I had to drive to North Vegas, which took me an hour.
I had to pay them $150 a week.
They took my money, cash, over the same counter that they changed my patch in.
Did they have gloves on?
No. Was it a sterile environment?
No, it was not. And I complained every time.
I said, you have to put me in a sterile environment, like a doctor's office.
And they said, no, no, you're fine.
You're fine. You're up on all your dues.
You're paying all your things. And we want to keep you.
We appreciate who you are because, you know, you have multiple businesses in the state.
We want to protect you.
And I said, well, you're not protecting me because you're not doing this in a sterile environment.
And I said, you're taking my cash with the same hand you're taking the patch off.
And you're an individual, just so the viewer knows, I mean, you have multiple business.
Your businesses are seeing, you know, millions of dollars in revenue.
You're respected within the community.
I mean, it's not like, you know, you have a long criminal record.
Generally speaking, there's a huge community behind you that looks at you and says, Mr.
A is a, you know, at least a moral character, a good person, and, you know, Nobody's ever claimed, as far as I know, that you've been on drugs or look like you're on drugs.
I've helped campaign multiple political people and hosted at my house to better our country.
You know, every day I fought through this through COVID and through everything.
But besides that, before this, you know, the system was broken.
The system was broken and I paid And every six months when I was about to graduate, all of a sudden I had a micro-nano, not a nano, a micro-nano, which was like a half a grain of salt.
And they said, oh, well, you have a half a grain of salt in your blood, so you've got to start the whole program all over again.
So we want you for another six months, every week, paying $150 a week, and you've got to drive a lot.
And to a certain point, so I did it for two years.
I did it for two years. And every six months, all of a sudden, I would have a dirty.
And I would go take blood.
I would go take at the same ATI that Lewis was talking about.
I took blood, I took urine, and I took hair.
And it's supposed to last in your hair for 90 days.
You know, any whatever, any kind of drug, maybe marijuana, whatever.
So 30 to 90 days.
I was in Dr.
Levy's outpatient rehab because I paid another 10 grand to prove that I was in a rehab, that I wasn't on drugs.
And I was the The spokesperson for this rehab.
They would have me speak every night and motivate people and help them build businesses.
And he would test me every day, every day, every day, every day.
And he fought the patches and said, this guy is the role model that we want to implement and we want to bring to all of our rehabs.
To inspire people.
And he is inspiring people.
And he fought the courts. And they said, well, one dirty is a dirty.
One dirty is a dirty.
I don't care about blood.
I don't care about urine. I don't care about hair.
One dirty is a dirty.
A micro nano is a micro nano.
And he is a drug addict.
And so I kept going through the steps.
And at a certain point, you know what I did?
As soon as they put that patch on me, I would get my car.
I took the patch off.
I put it in an airtight Tupperware.
And for six months, I never wore that patch.
I never wore that patch.
And they kept telling me I was dirty.
Every patch was dirty.
And I said, I didn't wear that patch for more than two seconds.
So you guys are more than full of...
I was livid at that point.
But at the same time, you know, I was proving, okay, if I went into a pool, if I went into a pool and I have pictures of all these patches, every patch that I wore, I have pictures from Scram and from Options.
Every patch that I wore, they wouldn't change my patch.
I said, this patch has holes in it and it's wrinkled.
It's not sealed anymore.
And I said, if I go to the gym and somebody has sweat on the bench, it's going to get in my patch.
Or I'm going to go to the pool and that sweat is going to get in my patch.
And they said, sorry, we can only change every ten days or every seven days.
They said, we're not going to take you in.
We don't have time for you.
We're too busy. And I said, this patch is contaminated.
It's open. I don't care.
Maybe my shower has something that is feeding into my patch.
Some of the chemicals, the hard water that we have in Vegas, I don't know.
Every time, within two days, I said, I'll pay another $150.
Give me a new patch right now because there is gaps in my patch and I can't wear this anymore.
And I said, it's contaminated.
They wouldn't do it. They wouldn't do it.
The scientists say that there's two kinds of contamination that occur.
Contamination from without and contamination from within.
What I was concerned about with a couple of my clients was that they were working in construction and they were sweating a lot and the patch was peeling and we would take pictures of the patch peeling.
So Fanny, let's go back to this.
Let's talk about the The half-life, or let's talk about any kind of medication.
What is the whole life?
How long can that last in your metabolism?
Well, here's what they tell you.
Let's just say it's five years or ten years, and that little...
It could still produce some kind of evidence that you used ten years ago, because it's still metabolizing in your body as a micronutrient.
That's a theory that I don't think the scientists have developed yet, but I certainly think it's there.
What they will say, what they say in opposition to, you know, calling them out on the patch is, and you say, wait, I've taken a urine every 48 hours or every 24 hours, and they'll say, well, you're just flying under the radar.
Now, there's not a lot of drug addicts, and I've known a lot of drug addicts, That are able to control their drug use to the extent that they would just use a little tiny bit today.
And then I won't use tomorrow because, you know, whatever.
So it's sort of a ridiculous, ridiculous theory.
Well, that was the court's excuse that, oh, I can beat a urine test, but I couldn't beat a sweat patch because it was 24 hours.
And I said, I'll take a pee test every two hours.
But meth lasts in your system at least, if you do it every 48 hours, it's getting out of your system within that 48 hours.
And so if you take a urine test every 48 hours, my client had, I think, 115 clean urines and 17 dirty patches.
If the problem, and here's the thing is, is that every, the federal employees, I think this is really important, is that SAMHSA, which is the agency that governs federal workplace testing, and the Naval Research Lab,
the reason that we were working with Naval Research Lab to get some research done Was they were really interested in using the patch because if it worked and if it didn't have the risk of false positives, it would be great for pilots and truck drivers and others, you know, that because It is on 24 hours, and so they were actually interested in showing that it actually was a viable alternative.
This is also less intrusive for the client.
You don't have somebody standing over you while you're being, you know, and it's more convenient because you don't need to come in as often.
Fine, but the problem was is that the federal employees union Gathered all of the information because FarmCheck, as I said, is looking to get into the federal workplace testing.
They're looking to get into workplace testing, period, because that's where the big bucks are.
And imagine, casino industry drug testing, if they were doing it regularly, or all of the pilots, if they were doing it regularly, then FarmCheck would make a lot of money.
And so they have gone to SAMHSA to get approval for use of the patch in federal workplace testing.
The SAMHSA has not approved it for federal workplace testing because the Federal Employees Union came in with a great summary.
I think I've sent it to every one of you probably with a great summary of all of the studies that have been done that show the risk of contamination of the patch and the reason why you might be coming up with false positive when somebody isn't using drugs.
And it's unpredictable when you start talking about the nanograms.
We had a former police officer swab down one of my client's houses to see, because there had been somebody living there before, to see maybe if the client was picking a drug in the environment, somewhere in the house.
There was drug everywhere.
There was drug in the vents.
It was meth. There was meth in the vents.
There was meth on the doorways.
And it's not seeable.
It's not something like you're looking at it and saying, oh, I better clean that up.
You can't see it.
And so you get these widely varying number of nanograms in the positive test.
Nobody quite understands it.
Sorry, you're specifically talking about, like, when you say there's meth, you know, everywhere, but you're talking about such tiny amounts that doesn't show that he's been necessarily smoking meth, but just such tiny residue amounts that could have been there, left there, like, a long time ago.
Is that what's going on? Three tenets ago, one of the first questions I always ask people is, are you living in the same place you were living in when you were using drugs?
If you are, you're likely picking up old drugs on your skin.
You don't know it.
And they're slapping a patch on there and it's coming up positive.
And sometimes it'll come up with a really high nanogram amount.
They'll say, my god, this guy's just really using a lot of drugs.
That's not the reason.
The reason is that the number of nanograms is going to vary based upon how much you're picking up on your skin.
Or when you've got a peeling patch or a patch that's got holes in it, how much is getting in under the patch and getting into the skin, metabolizing on the skin, and then having the metabolites come out in the testing.
Nobody has established the cutoff level.
It's not like urine where everybody agrees that the cutoff level is X. They've established a cutoff level that is so low that it can't screen out false positives like urins do.
I mean, why would this calamity of errors, you would think, you know, we look at our authorities and they're supposed to be smart, they're supposed to be educated people.
I mean, this is a very obvious equation here that these obviously don't work.
Now, how come they've been around for so long when it's pretty clear that there's major issues with these patches?
Because it's science and they will get They will get somebody to come in.
They have their own expert.
His name isn't Kardashian.
Kardashian is his name.
And he will come in and he'll say, oh, all of those studies that were done by the Naval Research Lab, there's all these flaws in these studies.
And the judges, because they do not understand science, The lawyers do not understand science, don't want to understand science, and they take a look at what either the drug testing program comes in with, but more likely it's what PharmChem comes in with, the information that they come in with.
They'll take a look at that information, it just looks like gobbledygook to them, and they won't listen to it.
And they won't listen to the former drug user because they just don't believe the former drug user.
Even though, theoretically, the former drug user wasn't even a drug user, because, like, you know, Lewis was saying here, like, he's never used drugs, you know, drugs, and this stuff's come out positive.
In the eyes of a court, he's a former drug user, even though it seems like, factually, he's not a former drug user.
I'm really confused because I actually have never met anybody who didn't have some kind of drug history getting a patch slapped on them.
And what kind of drug user volunteers to get drug tested?
What kind of addict says, yeah, go ahead and test me every 48 hours.
Yeah, I'll take as many urines as you want.
I did drug treatment for the first six years out of college and before I went to law school.
And that's not how that works.
Drunk users don't volunteer to get tested.
They do everything on earth possible to avoid getting tested.
Yeah, I hear you.
You're sending some facts.
Do you mind talking about this information a little bit?
I find this very enlightening.
Yeah, I'd have to. Well, my biggest thing is like is why it's been going on for so long is just the fact that they've got so much money to, like, for example, hire these, quote, expert witnesses that go into court and testify.
I have to refresh my memory, but it was One of the cases they agreed with, I think it was Pharm10 at the time, was that the expert witness had a degree from MIT in...
That's my case, Lewis. That's my case.
Oh, it was? Okay. Yeah.
And it was proven false.
That he never even went to that university and had a degree from there.
No, his background was false.
And that's one of the reasons why they never went back and re-heard these cases.
And he just used his expert testimony, but they never re-heard it after it was proven that it was false.
That's not accurate.
That's not accurate. That was my case.
And it was actually one of the scientists from PharmCam, it was PharmCam at the time, who came in.
Was it MIT? I'm sorry, it wasn't MIT. I can't remember which university it was, but my investigator went out and his whole resume was false with regard to his scientific background.
But he was the expert.
If I remember correctly, this was from California, a California case.
Oh, it may have happened again.
It may have happened again.
You know, I just did.
I think it might be a different, a different And for the most part, all I've seen is this one guy, this Cardesian guy, that come in and testify for farm chem.
I haven't seen anybody else, any other expert come in and refute.
I mean, sometimes they'll call the person who's applying the patch.
One family court case, the one that I testified in, their expert witness was this 27-year-old that was working in options.
You're actually paying these witnesses too.
I'm sorry, they're actually paying these witnesses to for their testimony These expert witnesses doesn't don't really sound like they're experts on for I mean, they sound like they're experts at something, but facts don't seem to be what they're experts at.
I mean, what's going on here in these court systems where you're having essentially these expert witnesses come and sell us fiction?
What's up with that? Farm Check goes to conventions and meetings of judges and has a booth the same way Westlaw does and the other legal tools that are being sold.
When there are meetings of judges, Farm Check will have a booth there with somebody who tells them the wonders of the patch.
And how easy it is and how, because it's on 24 hours a day, these users can't duck under the radar and they get sold on it that way, is my opinion.
I have to ask a question here because, you know, frankly, I'm much more in agreeance with Louise, I think.
And I understand your position as a lawyer, Franny, that, you know, there are certain things you can't say, which is unfortunate because lawyers should have the most freedom of speech and freedom of press.
But in our world, pragmatically, that's not the way it is.
It seems as though this is all willful ignorance because we had episodes on this drug called remdesivir where we had some of the top doctors in the world talk about how this drug remdesivir has been tested and shown that it causes liver failure to the tune of 20-30% of the individuals that are put on remdesivir.
Hence, and therefore, it is life-threatening.
But nonetheless, during COVID, financial incentives were given to the hospital to pit They're patients on remdesivir, which frankly, if a person is of a high age, low immunity, it's pretty much a death sentence, right?
So then I ask myself, all right, you see these doctors, they're following orders.
Let's say they're following orders, right?
So they're following orders, but in repetition, you're seeing that, wait a minute, Every time we use this drug remdesivir, there's like a one in three shot that the person dies.
And then those doctors, you think, would notice that there's something going on.
Now, that analogy I want to bring to the courts, right?
Judges and lawyers, they're seeing this repetition of people like Mr.
A walk in there with their suits, don't look like a drug dealer, very well spoken.
I mean, Mr. A seemed to have researched, I mean, everything about this.
He knew about all the details about how these patches aren't working.
You think that in repetition, seeing that, wait a minute, this picture is not matching.
Correctly. You think that these individuals would have some skepticism.
I mean, what do you guys think about that?
I think Brianna wants to be heard from over here.
Brianna. I'm just quiet in the back.
I don't know. I just want to tell my whole story whenever.
Please, please, please. Sorry?
Before we do, though, on that question in terms of why in repetition, where we're seeing failure for decades.
Failure, failure, failure.
It's not in repetition.
Think of how many family court cases there are and how many custody cases there are and how many people are getting their kids taken away because the patch has turned up dirty.
They don't know what to do.
The lawyer doesn't know what to do.
Frankly, half the time when I get calls from all over the country, I probably get a call a month from somebody somewhere that's got this issue.
And I will send all my packet of stuff to that person's lawyer and say, listen, your client is right.
There is a problem here.
The lawyers are not going to want to sift through the scientific stuff, and it's hard to convince the lawyers even that there's an issue that they should litigate.
So it's not being brought up repeatedly to the judges.
There has to be some way, and I know Leo Lewis was talking about that, there has to be some way to get this out to people.
I would have, if I had lost my case and if the federal probation was still using the patch, I'll guarantee you I would probably still, well, I think I would have had to have retired at some point But I would probably still be litigating it if they were accepting the patch.
But it's not being repeated repeatedly because there aren't people out there who know enough about it.
Mr. A knows way more about the patch than almost anybody you're going to find that comes into a courtroom.
But there are not many Mr.
A cases, I will tell you that, where the issue is litigated.
Curious. We're going to go to Brianna in a second, Franny.
You have a lot of experience.
By the way, we've got to talk about your book probably for another episode.
I mean, it's just fascinating that you've been in this industry for so long.
And I mean, God only knows what horrors you've seen like, but I want to hear all about it.
Now, in terms of the situation with Mr.
A, right? Your experience, you're listening to Mr.
A talk. I mean, you've never met Mr.
A. We haven't seen Mr. A's face.
I mean, does Mr. A to you sound like somebody that should have their children taken from them and not have any custody whatsoever?
And I'm asking more for your opinion on just hearing Mr.
A talk. Yeah, I don't think I have enough information to have an opinion on that.
Really, I'm just here for the patch.
You know, I've been fooled before, you know, so I was doing group therapy and actually in law school I actually lived in a residential drug treatment program.
And so, you know, that's the problem is that judges have been told many times by many people that they're not using drugs.
And the one thing that the patch will do is if somebody is using drugs, it will come up positive.
You don't find any false negatives with the patch.
It's just the false positives because it's either environmental contamination.
There's another toxicologist whose opinion is that it is more like what Mr.
A was talking about, which is that it's in your system.
You know, and then it's sort of spurting out a little bit, and then it'll show up as dirty on the patch.
It could be all of those things.
It could be all of those things.
And I'll tell you what the Federal Employees Union, their position is, and the position of many of the scientists that they talked to about this was, there is not enough research done on the patch to use it when it is being used with such consequence.
Taking away your kids or putting people in jail.
Sounds a lot like a jab that they just gave us with not a lot of research and they said it's the greatest thing in the world and a lot of people don't think it works and does worse.
But Brianna, let's talk a little bit about you.
Please tell us. I know we're busy here talking about these patches.
We really want to hear your story.
Tell us about what happened to you.
Okay. Well, so my story is it's really similar to almost Mr.
A's and Lou's.
I was accused of using drugs in custody court And basically, with no evidence, she said, OK, go take a drug test.
I went and took a drug test.
I passed. My attorney sent me to the wrong location.
So instead of just taking that drug test and we had a custody plan we agreed to and it would have been done, she said, no, you're going to go back to ATI and take the test.
There, where I want you to go.
I was late. I'm late everywhere I go.
But I was late. I wasn't using drugs, so I didn't see the big deal or how serious it was.
I waited for my daughter's school to be over before I went to ATI, because she was doing homeschool during COVID. So I got there, and they wouldn't let me test.
So I went back to court, and she said, well, I'm counting you dirty.
I'm putting you on the patch. OK, fine.
I said, that's fine. Great, I go down there, I give them a clean UA. It was three weeks later that, hold on, oh, my phone's about to die.
Hold on one second, let me plug it in.
No worries, no worries.
Okay, my friend's getting me the charger.
But three weeks later, she tells me, you owe us an extra $25.
I said, for what?
This is at options. I said, for what?
Because you're positive on the patch.
Every single positive patch, they charge you $25 extra.
It makes no sense.
Yeah, every time there's a positive.
It's crazy.
It's insane.
Options is, that's a whole other story.
Options is so corrupt and so insane.
But anyways, so then I got a hold of Frannie.
She told me, you know, I recommend you take the every other day.
So I would go to ATI and I'd also go to my counselor's office and I think I have a total of like 70 pages of negative urine tests and negative hair tests.
Nine hair tests and the rest all urine.
Every other day. I also gave birth to a clean baby that they tested negative.
And the cord blood test that they did goes all the way back to when I was 12 weeks gestational.
Or 12 weeks.
I think it's early as 12 weeks.
Everything was negative.
No one's taking my baby.
Never had CPS involvement.
My daughter was with me and me alone for seven years.
And now I see her three weekends a month.
I'm traumatized by the whole thing.
Dr. Leo Khadijan, whatever his name is, he testified at my trial.
And he lied.
Options. He, what was it he lied about?
I don't remember exactly what it was, but he, all he kept saying was a negative urine doesn't mean no drug use.
And he just kept repeating that over and over and over and over.
I mean, is that a false statement?
Is that a false statement? Like when somebody said...
That's not a false statement.
Not entirely, but they were pushing because that's how they explain that you, um, If you're negative on the urine but positive on the patch, it's because, oh, well they were probably positive but below the cutoff.
They're talking about the cutoff level is what they're talking about.
Right. And you can be.
One sec. I just want to ask a question about the patch versus the urine, okay?
Just for base understanding.
Now, which one's more reliable, like scientifically speaking, patch or urine?
Is there any data on the reliability of the urine?
Well, my expert, the guy that I worked with, that worked also with the scientist at the Naval Research Laboratory, said that urine is reliable.
You can count on urine.
And most judges are used to urine analysis.
They've been dropping urines on people for years.
I have not heard a lot in the times that I've been working on this issue that there is an issue with regard to urine.
And that's why I always tell people to go do 48-hour urines.
The cutoff level, let me just say something about the cutoff level.
The cutoff level on urine is scientifically established in, why?
In order to avoid false positives.
So that if you are a victim of secondhand smoke or if you have picked up drugs somewhere or something like that, it won't show up in the urine because the cutoff level is at a point Where it would, it would, it will not show positive if it is not.
And yet, and the cutoff level for sweat has to be lower just because of the nature of sweat.
But it also, the cutoff level was established by, guess who?
Farm camp. Farm camp.
And my levels were all over the place.
I mean, I'd have 25 one week, and then I had a couple over 2,000 nanograms.
On a few weeks. And then it'd be back down again.
None of my patches ever came back negative.
Not a single one.
And what I don't understand is how can...
My judge refused to look at any of my ATI tests I took.
Refused. And then the tests I took in my counselor's office, I was taking at 100 nanograms for cutoff for urine.
Those are all negative. Refused to look at those.
Said I could have forged them, even though they were sent directly to my attorney.
I had none of that. I had nothing in trial.
Franny was supposed to testify.
I didn't get to have her.
I didn't get to have my expert.
I didn't get to have anything. So it was all what Dr.
Leo and Kami said.
Who, by the way, Kami said that the patch adheres down to the third layer of skin.
And that if you're running a fever, it won't affect the temperature of your urine.
And she was found credible.
Like the third layer of skin, there's no way.
I don't know. And gosh, I wish I knew what Dr.
Leo said, if I remember.
But I mean, my case in my head plays out every day, word for word, over and over and over.
It's all I think about. It's changed me completely.
I can't even, I'm back now trying to get custody back of my daughter, just 50-50 from her dad.
And they're wanting me to do all these tests again.
And it gives me the most anxiety.
I can't go, I can't go do anything.
Like I can't, Physically bring myself, I'm in active litigation too with options because she falsified results to the court of my urine.
I was told to take, because the judge wanted to see after I had the baby, she kind of was thinking for a second, maybe something's going on.
So she added two random urines a week at options while I was on the patch.
All those urines were negative.
When the report came out to the court, it said that although Ms.
Maxwell's urine tests are negative, they were still positive but below the cutoff.
Therefore, she's still using meth, and that's why her patches are positive.
I called the actual laboratory that they send the urine to, and I have a signed affidavit from that laboratory and all my results and a letter specifically stating that there were no drugs above the cutoff or below the cutoff.
That exists in my results at all.
So, Kami now is making it, and the judge, she ignored that too.
That was the one piece of evidence I was allowed in, and it just went in one ear and out the other.
And Dr. Leo explained it away that they were talking about the initial, they weren't talking about the actual results, they were talking about when they initially, I don't know, some kind of crazy explanation he made for that letter that we showed.
And it's just Cammie Reeves at Options.
Yet the whole changing, I've complained to Health and Human Services.
She doesn't glove up.
The girl would touch the patch, clean me, and then she'd start touching doorknobs and money and my debit card and pushing the buttons.
And then she'd, you know, put on the new patch.
Never changed her gloves.
Half the time she didn't wear gloves.
No one's ever wanted to listen to it.
No one cares. There's a whole study, one of the studies that's in that packet of material was the Naval Research Lab did a study showing that the way that they clean the skin is insufficient.
So if there's a drug on your skin, simply using an alcohol swab is not sufficient to remove the drug that's adhered to your skin.
Right, and then even at options, they'll have you wash your own arms sometimes.
Go wash your arm and then come back out over here.
And this is, the judge decided that I was a long-time meth user who had learned to control my addiction by taking smaller doses.
That's what she said in the custody thing.
So basically, I microdosed meth, in other words, is what I'm gathering.
But what doesn't make sense is how come every, all of us, Whether you're male, female, whether you're heavy or skinny or old or young, somehow all of us just magically know that correct amount of drugs to take every day to stay below the radar of urine.
You know, this is exactly what I'm talking about.
This is exactly what I'm talking about.
You see this in repetition, and I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Like, I completely disagree with you, Franny, because you see this in repetition over and over and over again.
It just comes to a point...
Where, you know, let me put it this way, right?
People's lives and children on the line.
When I'm talking to Brianna and I'm talking to Louis, I'm seeing two individuals that are deeply traumatized whose lives have been carpet bombed by this system, right?
You would think that if we're going to destroy the lives of parents and individuals to this degree, let's at least get our testing mechanisms, right?
This is what competent individuals do.
But it's like the degree of incompetence that to me tells me it's very much like COVID, right?
An untested situation, damn be we the people, damn be the citizens, because there is a certain bit of elitist mentality that you can do this to people.
The fact that you think you could even leave 1% of a chance Between a father or mother seeing their child versus not seeing them, leaving even 1% of a chance to risk, to me, reeks of incompetence.
But I would love to hear everybody's opinion on what I just said.
Well, I'm not saying that it's not brought up repeatedly.
It is brought up repeatedly.
What doesn't happen repeatedly is listen to Brianna.
You know, I don't know what kind of issues you had, Brianna, with getting your lawyer to listen to you, you know, in terms of understanding that, no, you're not using.
But that's half the time when I talk to people, I say, well, who's your lawyer?
Because I got to talk to your lawyer.
I can't talk to your drug. And here's the packet of material.
I got it all on the internet and I sent it off and I never hear from anybody again.
So it's not that it's not brought up repeatedly.
It's that nobody buys it.
Lawyers are not litigating it.
They're either not litigating it because they don't buy it, or they don't want to do it, or the person doesn't have enough money to pay for it, or the person doesn't have enough money to pay for a toxicologist.
You know, as I say, I haven't seen anybody but this Khadijian guy testify on behalf of FarmCheck.
Let me ask you something though, Franny.
You were talking about a case 20 years ago where it was already determined that this stuff wasn't reliable.
I mean, isn't that enough? You know, again, we're talking about if you have a window open where, okay, we're about to destroy this person's life.
The children are going to be traumatized.
The mom's going to be traumatized. Everybody's going to be traumatized.
We're just going to really make a complete crap show out of this, right?
To do that sort of thing.
And when there's even a sliver of a chance of this being an incorrect avenue, I mean, wouldn't you say, and that sliver of a chance, sounds like that sliver of a chance was opened up with that case from 20 years ago.
Why is it that these risks are still taken when you clearly have something that's more reliable like a urine test?
Right, it's because it's easy.
It's easy and people are making money off of it.
I'm not saying judges are making money off of it, but options is making money off of it, farm channels are making money off of it.
I have never heard if you had to pay if you were positive, there's an incentive to have it found positive anyway.
Did all you guys have to pay extra for positive patches too?
They say it's less intrusive too.
Sorry, sorry.
Let's start that again because there was crosstalk.
Do you mind, Mr. A, do you mind starting your sentence again?
Yeah, so go back to the cost of like a urine test.
Like those little strips that you could put in your urine, it costs you maybe $10 over the counter.
You could do it yourself. And they will test opiates, they will test cocaine, they will test methamphetamines, and they'll test THC pot, right?
So those four test strips cost like $10 to freaking do.
If you do the patch, it's $100 a week.
$100 a week. Then what Brianna is saying is, just like with me, as soon as there was a positive, you had to pay because there was a positive and they had to start you all over with the program.
So now you had to be reinitiated to the program.
Oh, yeah. All your paperwork all over again.
You had to do all this stuff with the court.
And now you look like a drug addict.
So over and over again.
So I did this for three years with options.
I stopped after three years.
I did it for two.
After three years of every six months, something came up.
Every six months, something came up.
Every time I was about to graduate, they would reinstate me in the program.
They're like, oh, we want to keep this guy.
He's the one that's actually still paying.
So what I did on my own is I went to LabCorp.
I went to LabCorp. I did blood and urine every other day.
Every other day for two years.
No matter if I was on vacation, I was traveling during COVID. I was in Palm Springs.
I was in California. I was in every different state every five days because I was traveling with my companies.
I was in Destin, Florida.
And what did I do? I found a LabCorp and I went to LabCorp and got all these tests.
I submitted two years of every 24 hours, every 48 hours, whatever, blood and urine to the judge to re To re-initiate my custody for my kids.
And she said, I commend you for everything that you've done.
It's amazing. But the order back from 19-whatever says that you have to do patches for six months.
And so I looked at my wife and I said, I can't go through this again.
I don't believe in the program.
And she said, just try one more time.
Just try one more time.
And you know what I did? I tried one more time and I did it for three months.
I went back to court and the judge told me every one of those patches was dirty at a high level of cocaine.
And I said, you have to be kidding me.
This is while we're running. And I just looked at my wife and I started crying.
And I just, at a certain point, I've lost my kids.
My kids won't even talk to me because my ex-wife has told him, well, as soon as your dad stops doing drugs, as soon as he stops You know, being a drug addict, that's all we want him to do and all the courts want him to do is stop doing drugs.
You know, you can see him again.
You can see him again. I paid $60 a day for a supervised visitation, traveling to California from Vegas, traveling to...
Now she's in Virginia.
The courts let her move wherever she wants to go.
And I have to pay daily for a supervised visitation for four hours a day.
You know how I can mold my kids in four hours?
I can't. I can't break what my ex Instilled in their minds.
And it just breaks my heart.
It breaks my heart. And to go back and try to fight these things, it's disheartening.
And I've done everything in my power.
I've done everything in my power.
And I've looked for civil suits.
I've tried to create civil suits.
And Vim, God bless you, brother.
I love you bringing this back to the table.
I'm ready to go to war.
I've been ready to go to war.
They're like, well, I'm ready.
One dirty is a dirty.
One dirty is a dirty, you know?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. This is why we're doing this.
This is why we're doing this. This is why we do our episodes.
I mean, we're bringing a community together right now because this is nonsense.
This is nonsense, okay?
They're playing Russian roulette with parents' life.
The incompetence with which they are choosing these tests.
I mean, honestly, I think the COVID situation broke the back of that.
You know, I got friends from that were hardcore leftists that are telling me, oh, my uncle's got myocarditis.
Well, guess what? These industrial camp complexes, I'm sorry, they are not for our benefit.
They are not doing right by the American families because good American parents shouldn't be traumatized the way y'all are traumatized.
And I've met too many people like that, that are traumatized, that they have PTSD. They can't sleep at night.
You know, it's just, you know, enough's enough.
I mean, we got to publicize this stuff.
And I want you all to know, America Happens, the Blood Money Podcast, you know, this is what we're all about.
We're building this network for this reason, because these stories need to come to light.
And, you know, this has to change.
But I'd like to wrap it up at this point.
Guys, is there, I want each one of you to have, you know, the mic is yours, you know, say whatever you want to say, take as long as you want.
Brianna, let's start with you.
Okay, I guess the only thing I have left to say is I wish that there was a way to do a study to make it official and take blood two days before you get the patch on and every single day wearing the patch.
And I know that if it was me, my blood would be negative.
I just know it and the patch would be positive.
That should be the end-all.
That should just prove right there I just don't know how to do that or get anything like that started or official.
I wish that there was a way.
That's my biggest wish.
And that's it. And I'd love to have my daughter back home with me.
I know, I know. The trauma is serious.
It's really bad.
It's really bad. Thank you for doing this show.
I mean, I wish there was words I could tell you, Brianna.
I wish there was words. I mean, what do you say?
What do you say? I mean, it's like an evil world.
It's like so many people like you.
And it's unfortunate.
It's unfortunate that this is happening in this country.
And we wonder why the future generation is falling apart.
We wonder why there's children out there that think they're potatoes and they think they're pigeons.
Like, they literally have that belief.
You know what I mean? Did this occur, Franny, during your generation?
When you're growing up, where children, you know, they thought like, oh, I'm a cat, you know what I mean?
No, this is mental illness brought down by the breakdown of the family, my opinion.
Just my opinion. Frannie, final words.
These judges are elected, okay?
I think if we could get a reporter, you know, from a You know, a reporter from the RJ or I got a call a while back from Vice, which is actually a big deal place, and they were interested because they were getting calls.
They didn't call back after that because it's hard to explain.
Listen to what we've been talking about, nanograms and peeling patches, and it's hard to explain.
But I would love it if there was enough publicity about the problem with the patch that a judge or a couple of judges Would start looking at it more carefully and start worrying about getting re-elected.
Yeah, yeah, totally. And by the way, Franny, you know, we're a much, much smaller company than any of those ones that you've mentioned, whether RJ or Vice, and that we've done a number of exposés and judges and lawyers.
And let me tell you, we got a nice little hit list.
We're up to number five of people whose lives and careers will never be the same because You know what?
You expose this stuff in a documentary form with evidence, right?
With evidence, that's a big thing.
Timing and pacing is a big part of it too.
You have to do it in a concise fashion, just like presenting a legal case.
But if you present the situation For what it is, whether it's a corrupt judge or a lawyer, believe me, all you need to do is publicize.
That's why they put all these gag orders in the family law, because some of the horrors that we've heard, you put that stuff out on a documentary and let their neighbors know.
Let everybody in there, let, you know, if they're, you know, if they're voted in to office, let everybody know what they did while they're in office.
You've got a bunch of people right now on here that have a lot of information.
I know, I know, and we're here.
I'm really fascinated.
And we are here to publicize it.
And Frannie, much respect to you, by the way.
I know your position.
I know you're walking a tightrope.
The fact that you've done as much as you've done, I mean, God bless you for doing what you've done thus far.
No, no. Listen, anybody will tell you, when I was the federal public defender, I was in trouble all the time.
I'll take on any judge.
I'm just not prepared to take on family court.
I'm ready to take on the patch.
I understand. Believe me, I understand.
I mean, the fact that you're even here on the Blood Money Cap podcast says a lot about where your heart's at.
Lewis, sir. What's up?
You know, by the way, we're almost up to episode 200.
We've had like really highly credible guests thus far.
Blood money, you know, frankly, all our problems are blood money.
So that's what we discuss on this blood money podcast.
We discuss all of our problems in their different forms.
And really, these are the three C's that we discuss.
Conspiracy, corruption, and controversy.
And within that, unfortunately, there's way too much subject matter to discuss, especially right now.
Lewis. When you say blood money, it makes me think of, like how I said, FarmTem, they spend so much money in defense of their product.
If you even Google anything about the sweat patch, the first 10 things that come up is in defense of the sweat patch and Dr.
Leo that, you know? But all the same thing as COVID-19.
Everybody's like, oh, I feel like crap after I took that jab.
But you go on Google and it's like the first page is like how amazing it is.
Anyway. I'm curious what the pass-fail rate is at Options.
Because nobody ever knows. I mean, does everybody fail?
It seems like it. But anyways...
They won't even give you your own records.
They refuse. But anyways...
Everybody said that they're ready for the next step and ready for war.
So I think that maybe we should maybe get together inside of this and another time and plan for it.
You know, I was thinking about, like I was mentioning, starting a nonprofit to educate the public about the sweat patch.
And with that, we would do a press release, create a website, trying to combat the false information out there on the internet.
Maybe Organize some pickets of the company just to draw some publicity or draw some attention because nobody's ever done anything like this before.
So I think that's one of the things that we should look forward to doing as far as getting the nonprofit set up.
That's like the first step.
So I don't know how everybody else feels about that, but I'm on Facebook and you can message me and get ahold of me there or in the Sweat Patch Facebook group that Brianna is always on.
And one thing I want to mention for the viewer real quick, our email address is americahappensatprotonmail.com.
That's americahappensatprotonmail.com.
Anybody that's interested in this topic, that is a whistleblower, that is somebody that wants to be on our podcast, tell their story, expose things, please email us.
And especially if you're interested in being part of this group that we're setting up.
Because one of the announcements I haven't made yet is that we are...
In the process of forming, we'll be a very formal group and situation.
The way you will find out that we have made this announcement, there's going to be a Blood Money episode, this podcast, and it's literally going to be red.
The whole thing's going to be blood red, right?
When you see that, watch that episode.
That is going to be the start of something pretty amazing.
Mr. A, sir, let's get your final words here.
You know what? My heart pours out to anybody that's been through this program and had their kids taken from them.
I cry daily, you know, for my kids.
I've done everything in my power.
I mean everything I could think of to win those kids back.
And again, all I could do is pray to God and I thank God for every blessing that he's given me and every blessing that he gives me every day.
Bye.
Yeah.
I just want to protect future parents.
We'll get there. And future children, you know, they don't deserve this.
They deserve both parents.
They deserve good parents.
You know, there's plenty of people that could be avoid the system in child sport and you know there's bad fathers there's bad whatever mothers you know and there's drug addicts but there's people like us that are are fighting and that are stand stand up citizens that will do whatever it takes and have proven ourselves over and over again but just to be beaten by a system that is not not true or not fair or you know For me to prove four
other ways, but one way is going to take my kids, this is disheartening.
This is sickening. And yes, my PTSD, like Rhianna said, is immense.
And when my wife tried to talk me back into doing this again, even doing this call gives me PTSD.
And I, because I miss my children.
So again, Ben, I honor and praise you for everything that you do and I'm thankful for you and I'm thankful for tonight.
I'm thankful for everybody that's been on here and I'm ready to stand side by side like I always have to fight the truth and to stand up for what's right and for God and honor in our government and in our systems and that's what we need to restore and I love you, brother. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Any, any other?
If you, if we, once you get going and you get your group going and you need somebody, I'll, I've got the receipts.
You know, I'll, I'll come in and show you, show you what, what I got.
I still feel just as passionately about this issue as I did 20 years ago.
Actually, I think it's 25 years ago.
You're an amazing lady, Franny, seriously.
I mean, all you guys are amazing, but I know you're in the system, and again, I so much appreciate, I mean, what you've done, Pioneer, and, you know, this whole thing, and, you know, we see you, you know, we hear you, we appreciate you.
Thank you, everybody, for being on the Blood Money Podcast.
Remember, you're gonna see a thumbnail that's gonna be blood red, and that is the episode where it all starts coming You know, pretty early in the new year.
We are going to do the unexpected.
We are going to do unearthed talks.
It's going to be fully, fully legal, all under the law, but we are going to make some noise in the new year.
So thank you for joining us on this Blood Money Podcast.